Who was the most overrated wrestling mind?

[It's Damn Real!]

We hear about them everyday – the Paul Heymans, the Vince McMahons, the Gabe Sapolskys, etc. They're the "geniuses" behind the scenes, pulling all the strings on the proverbial puppet to make all of us cheer and cry and boo and dance at the snap of their finger, right?

But are they overrated?

No one will argue that Heyman isn't responsible for most of what became of ECW, but can anyone also not admit that as a businessman, he was a failure? Were it not for his propensity to bounce checks, might ECW be bigger today, or still around?

No one will argue that McMahon built the largest wrestling empire in the world, but would you also not agree that he monopolized the industry so much so to the point that all things that don't fit the WWE mold are now unorthodox or worse yet, wrong?

No one will argue that Bischoff lit a fire that nearly consumed Vince's creation over the course of two years, but would you not also agree that his propensity to throw huge matchups away for free on television revolutionized the industry in a bad way?

The quesiton is, since all of the aforementioned names (as well as others) are overrated in some facet or facets, who is the most overrated? That is, who gets praised the most among these choices (or your own write-in if you feel none match your opinion) for being what you feel is not actually as good as they are/were billed to be, and why?

 

[Tenta]

Very good thread. I went with Russo, not because everyone thinks he's good, because I believe it's been soundly proven he isn't. I chose him because he's actually rated, and he shouldn't. Anyone who believes this bug eyed Golem (not the Pokemon, mind you) has built himself to be the architect of the Attitude Era, when we're all aware that simply isn't the case. Left to his own devices, and without someone to edit his thoughts and keep him in line, he's an absolutely terrible addition to any booking team. His ideas for "Crash TV" and his feeling that the belts mean nothing but props are things that ultimately make us laugh. His openly xenophobic statements, such as that lovely feeling he has for "Mexicans" and "Japanese" are offensive. Still, this man manages to get work, in one of the most illogical reasonings anyone could ever consider. The man isn't the genius he portrays himself to be, and even though we know that, the fact that he even has a job is quite miraculous.

So yeah, totally Vince Russo. Good thread though

 

[The Viper Orton]

i agree with tenta, Vice Russo proved that he sucks as a wrestling mind. Well the only way he worked was with Vince McMahon filtering his ideas. Its like when I give 1 good idea out of ten. I was successful when only he one good idea was chosen. But when the ten are shown, i appear to be one of the stupidest around.

 

[shattered dreams]

I actually think Russo is without a doubt the most underrated wrestling mind. Not because he is "the architect of the attitude era" but because it seems like the mass opinion of him is that he is one of the worst ever. Personally, I think it is crazy to say he has anything less than a slightly above average wrestling mind when looking at the entirety of his body of work. So for me that is a huge gap. He did not make the attitude era but he absolutely made some great contributions to it. I have a hard time believing picking out the great idea makes someone so much more of a genius than the person that actually developed the idea.

On who is overrated it is tough to answer because it depends if "wrestling mind" means just creative or includes business. If it includes business savvy then McMahon is entirely deserving of his reputation. I do get the feeling this Vince is actually the overrated one when it comes to creative though. Everyone likes to talk about unfiltered Russo being so bad but I am not convinced unfiltered McMahon is very good either. When people are afraid to talk McMahon out of stuff we end up with those cheesy comedyish segments that turned a lot of us off to wwe in the post-attitude era. It kind of seems like Vince squared was great together but separate they suffer. McMahon had the business vision and practicality while Russo brought the creative style for the generations tv watchers. It is amazing how different the perceptions are of the two though. Then you have Paul Heyman who has the opposite problem of McMahon. He let the creative side rule his product to a fault.

 

[Prax]

I voted Heyman. The guy hasn't REALLY done all that much and everyone is constantly on his penis like he's the greatest thing to ever happen to wrestling.

Vince build a billion dollar wrestling company out of a regional thing his father started. Gotta respect him for that.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I believe that certain wrestling minds are stronger in some areas than others.

Vince McMahon is easily the favorite target of wrestling critics. Not that he doesn't deserve criticism at times, don't get me wrong there. But, there's no denying that Vince McMahon is the greatest businessman in pro wrestling history. He may be a control freak that would love for the WWE to be the one and only wrestling company in the whole long history of pro wrestling, but there's no denying that he's built his company into something that every promoter dreamed of. No matter what you might hear, Dixie Carter essentially wants TNA to have what the WWE has and wants TNA to be where the WWE is. As far as Vince on the creative side, I don't think he's as strong but he's certainly far from terrible. Vince does enjoy corny humor and does go out of his way to make sure that it occassionally finds its way onto Raw but, even the most hardened McMahon critic has to admit that the corny skits and humor have been DRAMATICALLY cut on WWE Raw this year as compared to last year.

As for Paul Heyman, I do sometimes believe that Heyman gets a little too much credit sometimes. Basically, if you don't believe that Paul Heyman is an absolute god on these forums then you'll be set upon by diehard ECW fans like rabid dingos on an Australian baby. I do give him credit for things he did, he did come up with some innovative storylines in ECW. But ultimately, because of Heyman, ECW went belly up. Heyman is good, don't misunderstand me, but I don't believe that he's THAT good.

The most overrated wrestling mind in my view has got to be Vince Russo. It's been said in other threads by other posters before that Russo is not nearly the genius he's been made out to be when he doesn't have a filter for his ideas and his thoughts. Let him do whatever he wants and, more often than not, it turns out to be awful. I don't agree that he killed WCW, it was a decision made by corporate executives to take WCW off the air. But nobody can remotely convince me that Vince Russo wasn't responsible for a massive declide in the quality of the programming. His time overall in TNA definitely hasn't been that much to brag about. Things have gotten better over the past 3 or 4 weeks, but 2010 has not been a banner year for TNA thus far, not by a long shot.

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

Michael Cole. haha, just kidding. I know he's not really a "wrestling mind" but he certainly acts like he is. The guy thinks he's the best thing since sliced bread (and not the Brian Kendrick finisher either!).

Vince McMahon gets a lot of criticism, but there's no way he's even close to the most overrated on the list. Even if he was overrated, which he's not, he's so far down the list it's not even funny.

Paul Heyman has been hyped lately as the greatest thing of all time in the wrestling world. I say he's overrated in the last few years, just because WWE has made ECW look like shit, so people think Paul-E's production was the greatest thing ever. I do think he's great, and the fact that he can make greats out of nobodys is impressive.

Eric Bishoff is awesome. Enough said.

Russo...yeah, let's go with Russo. There's just nothing good about him...at all. If Mark Madden thinks he's the worst wrestling booker of all time, I guess I can't disagree...

 

[AltMan!!!]

Had to go with Russo. I think history thus far shows us that is true. There's never really been any affirmation about his contributions to the character development of the WWE he's taken credit for, then we see a lot of failure = most over rated. I didn't recognize all the names on the list but the next person would be Heyman is you ask me. He had ECW and did a lot with a little there, but he generally has the same recipe he wants to use, and ECW imploded for a reason.

 

[Ferbian]

There's really two I would argue are overrated wrestling minds. I'm a little torn in which one of them are the most overrated though.

Jim Cornette. I cannot stand this guy. So it might become a biased post more than anything. The fact that he keeps drawing towards the "Kayfabe is life" style. It really just screams lack of following with the times. Following with the times helps remaining a great wrestling mind.

Cornette has often struck me as one of the biggest idiots in the business. He makes rant after rant towards everybody that has lashed out at him the least. If the rumors are true. He threatened Bischoff's life. It doesn't really help my thoughts of him.

The other one which seems to be pretty unanimous is Vince Russo. Russo always struck me as the type of person who just like Cornette believes that what he does is the right thing. His booking was a good part in killing WCW. His booking! I mean holy shit if that doesn't make someone an overrated wrestling mind. I seriously am lost forward in terms of what does.

I think Russo appears to still be riding off the wave of the Attitude Era. The one single thing he made huge. But failed to capitalize on it again when he returned from WCW. He returned and couldn't get it to work again. That doesn't help in remaining a great wrestling mind either.

 

[Cookie14]

I'm going to assume that when you say 'over rated' you are talking about how that person sees themselves, as opposed to how we see them. If that's the case, then I've got three choices, none of which have made your list.

Kevin NashHis booking was some of the worst during the darkest days of WCW. If you believe what you hear, then he not only booked himself to end Goldberg's streak, he also booked the Fingerpoke of Doom. Yet he thinks he's a great booker

Jeff JarrettHe started TNA, nothing wrong with that. Infact, they were doing ok for themselves..... Then he decided to bring in Dixie Carter.... BIG MISTAKE!!
This leads me nicely onto my final choice......

Hulk HoganThe fact that he thinks he can still bring anything significant to any wrestling organisation in any capacity, proves that he rates himself far higher than anyone else you mentioned.

Im not trying to bash TNA, I used to like them a lot. But I don't think it's a coincidence that they have gone backwards since these 'great minds' teamed up

 

[shattered dreams]

For everyone voting Russo just who is saying he is not shit? If the mass opinion of people in this thread is he is shit then how is he so overrated? Is he really drastically worse than shit? I just do not get it. Russo is arguably the most unpopular person in the history of prowrestling, yet somehow he is overrated? I think it depends on how you look at it. I guess many are voting on what people say about themselves versus the reality of what they have done, opposed to the what is the reality of what they have done versus the mass opinion of what they have done. I almost voted for Cornette when I was thinking about the former then I realized we all know everything that makes him suck and dislike him, thus he is not overrated. The question is not who is the shittiest wrestling mind, it is who is the most overrated.

 

[Optimist Prime]

I picked Paul Heyman. As one person stated above. While Vince Russo continues to find work and be praised by those he currently works with...the majority of the fan base feels as though he's been horrendous anyway...thus not making him overrated whatsoever.

I believe Paul Heyman worked with what he had. He couldn't do much...so he didn't. And I strongly believe the personalities he had in ECW were more of the reason the company was mildly successful. I don't think you can just create a brand...have a vision...and it just work. But that could be said for McMahon, etc. as well. I just think that since he didn't have enough money for the big honchos...he used common sense and created a brand based around lower budget wrestlers...which just so happened to be the "extreme" style guys in a time where giants were paid by the millions.

I don't necessarily think Paul Heyman was a failure or a "bad" wrestling mind. I just feel that he was the most overrated out of the bunch.

Vince McMahon took a rag tag wrestling business and turned it into an empire using several unique ideas.

Eric Bischoff took a middle-of-the-road wrestling business (albeit with Ted Turner backing it) and beat that McMahon empire for several years using several unique ideas.

Paul Heyman took a 3rd rate wrestling business and made it the best 3rd rate wrestling business he could using the resources that he had. Basically, in a nut shell, he did his job.

 

[harrythem]

I picked Dusty Rhodes. The man has had multiple stints at booking in multiple companies and always done a piss-poor job, get himself fired, then get himself rehired by somehow giving someone else the blame. He's damaged more careers with his booking then he's helped yet he's somehow always managed to get himself work. Makes the mind boggle.

I do think Vince is a wrestling genius but I will say I feel sorry for Stephanie. When it comes to Russo people say the reason the attitude era was so successful was because Vince censored him. Now Steph's in charged it seems if something great happens Vince gets the praise for it but, if it's something bad, Stephanie and creative carries the can. I know their not blameless but, it seems Vince gets the ultimate get out of jail card when something dies a death.